Role of Geotechnical Velocity Models in Shake Zone Scenarios of South Lake Tahoe Basin

C EC S
an NSF + USGS center

K. Hall (hallka@whitman.edu), J. Louie [1] Whitman College, Walla Walla, WA, [2] University of Nevada Reno, Reno, NV
I will be at my poster Sunday 20:00 - 20:30, Monday 14:30-15:00 and Tuesday 21:00 - 21:30

Seismological Laborator y

Introduction
There are three major factors that control ground motion in an earthquake: the source; the geometry of the basin; and the properties of the materials that the waves are traveling through. Using the Nevada Shake Zoning (NSZ) methodology developed by Dr. John Louie, we looked at the role of the geotechnical data set on the ground motion. For these models we looked at the South Lake Tahoe Basin; speci cally we examined the impact of a rupture on the south end of the West Tahoe Fault. The South Lake Tahoe basin was of particular interest given its location on the western edge of the Basin and Range province and the large tourist draw of the area. The West Tahoe fault itself has the largest vertical o set of the faults in the area and it last ruptured at about 4000 years ago (Brothers et. al. 2009). We looked to compare a limited geotechnical data set that we had, to more comprehensive but theoretical data sets.
Map of Vs30 Values for Raw Data set
Interpolation: Distance Weighted Average Radius: 3 km
km East 0.0 16.68 22.08 22.08 0.0

Results
Map of Vs30 Values for Wald Data set
Interpolation: Nearest Neighbor Radius: 4 km
km East 16.68

Basin Thickness Map

Map of Vs30 Values for Geologic Map Data set
Interpolation: Quadrant Radius: 5 km
km East 0.0 16.68 22.08 0.0 km East 16.68 22.08

km North

km North

km North

0.0

0.0

0.0

Vs30 km/s

Vs30 km/ s

Vs30 km/s

1.23

Basin Thickness, k m

Hotter colors = deeper basin = more shaking Created by MA-CME using corrected gravity data from UNR 492 class Island of bedrock created by picking points in Google Earth Shows linear artifact on the upper right of map o Product of interpolation of data in MA-CME Roughness of map corresponds to the lack of detail in the data set

0.0

1.52

0.0

1.52

0.0

1.52

0.0

Methods
Vs30 Geotechnical and Gravity Basin-Thickness Data o Gravity collected by UNR Applied Geophysics Class in 2012 o Vs30 values collected using Refraction Microtremor (SeisOpt ReMi, 2012 Optim) technique also collected by UNR Applied Geophysics Class in 2012 Fault Parameters o Estimated as a nite fault plane contained within the grid o Strike = 345 o Dip = 80 o Length ~13 km o Centered at 38.6, -120.1; hypocenter at bottom center All parameters compiled into a code using Model Assembler Community Modeling Environment (MA-CME) and then run using E3D from Shawn Larsen at LLNL. o MA-CME uses a relationship between velocity and depth to model properties below 30 m

Raw Data o About 20 refraction microtremor measurements established Vs30 for bottomlands, moraines, and granite o Mainly controlled by basin thickness Wald Vs30 Extrapolation from Topographic Slope o Much slower Vs30 in comparison to other two maps o Corresponds to basin shape o Points of slow Vs30 not associated with Quaternary sediments in lower half of map Geologic Map Data o Corresponds to basin shape o Vs30 values set to the same range as Raw Data set o Shows the basin continuing out, matching the geologic map o False Bedrock inside the basin
Map of Peak Ground Velocity (cm/sec)
for Wald Data set
km East 0.0 16.68

Discussion
Two major artifacts in the scenarios o Chopping up of the waves due to the interpolation of a gridded data set Most prevalent in the Wald data Must use Nearest Neighbor interpolation to minimize these e ects o Unrealistic ampli cation of the waves at the top of the basin Possibly due to boundary conditions of grid Could be attributed to the abrupt ending of the basin at the edge Possible solution is to have the entire basin contained within the grid Dramatically increases the size of grid and thus computation time Basin thickness and shape most important factor Above is an example of a frame o Controls where waves are captured and amplified from a ShakeZone scenario o Consistent feature throughout the three models showing initial wave propogation Can create a viable model from limited Vs30 data as well as waves starting to be o Requires that you have good data for rock and soil trapped in the basin velocities as you set these parameters in MA-CME o Anywhere without Vs30 data uses basin thickness to estimate velocity

Map of Peak Ground Velocity (cm/sec)

for Raw Data set
km East 0.0 16.68

Map of Peak Ground Velocity (cm/sec)

for Geologic Map Data set
km Easst 0.0 16.68

22.08

22.08

22.08

Geologic Map Scanning Program

Written in Python using the PIL and webcolors Justification o Color on most geologic map corresponds to lithology o Hard rock has a higher Vs30 than the soft basin sediment How the program works o Scans every set amount of pixels (set by user) o Identi es the color o Prompts for a Vs30 value at every new color o Creates a text file of lon, lat, Vs30 Drawbacks to the program o In pixilated images certain colors are misinterpreted E.g., Black on yellow is read as green Advantages to the program o Can scan any map including non-digitized versions
km North km North km North

0.0

0.0

0.0

PGV cm/sec

cm/sec

cm/sec

Conclusion
NSZ produces PGV over 200 cm/sec due to trapping of energy in hanging-wall basin o Building and planning must accommodate previously unanticipated large motions Small dierences in Vs30 create large dierences in PGV o Amplifications over a factor of 2 and deamplifications of a factor of a half o Hazard estimations cannot be accurate without dense Vs30 measurements Scanning a geologic map provides a preview of hazards and possibly locations of shaking hot spots o Could possibly be used to focus areas of dense measurements

200.0

0.0

200.0

0.0

200.0

0.0

Due to shaded basin map below, PGV of pure yellow or 200 cm/sec are seen as green Peak ground motion along fault as predicted High ground velocities within the basin o Waves are trapped in the basin creating the orange/yellow peak with in the basin Geologic Data set o Shows high ground motion further south than any other map due to low Vs30 values in the southern portion of the map The animations of these three scenarios can be found at http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFB8CAE6F9070CCAD
Amplification of PGV by Geotechnical Data
Geologic Map/Wald Data
km East 22.08 0.0 16.68

Amplification of PGV by Geotechnical Data

Geologic Map/Raw Data
km East 22.08 0.0 16.68

Resources
Anderson, J.G., Wesnousky, S.G. and Stirling, M.W., Earthquake size as a function of fault slip rate, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America(June 1996), 86(3):683-690 Brothers, D.S. et al., 2009, New Constraints on Deformation, Slip Rate, and Timing of the Most Recent Earthquake on the West TahoeDollar Point Fault, Lake Tahoe Basin, California, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, April 2009, vol. 99, no. 2A 499-519 Dingler, J. et. al., 2008, A high-resolution seismic CHIRP investigation of active normal faulting across Lake Tahoe Basin, California-Nevada, Geological Society of America Global Vs30 Map Server, 2009, http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/apps/vs30/ Louie, J.N., 2012, Nevada ShakeZoning (NSZ) and the ModelAssembler Community Seismic Modeling Environment (MA-CME), http://crack.seismo.unr.edu/nsz/ Saucedo, G.J., 2005, Geologic map of the Lake Tahoe basin, California and Nevada, 1:100,000 scale: California Geological Survey, Regional Geologic Map No. 4, scale 1:100000
0.0

km North

Amplification Factor

2.0

0.0

Amplification Factor

Amplification and Dampening of PGV o Red = ampli cation o Blue = dampening o White = no e ect Comparison shows the eectiveness of the Geologic map scan o Amplification along the rim of the basin in both maps o Increased detail of the geologic map data set causes ampli cation in the lower half of the map

Acknowledgements
km North

0.0

2.0

0.0

I want to thank SCEC for the opportunity to do this research through the SURE intern program. I would also like to thank Dr. John Louie for all of his guidance throughout this project. It would not have been possible to complete this project without him. Thanks to Gretchen Schmauder for sharing her knowledge about the South Lake Tahoe Basin. Thank you to William Savran for sharing his knowledge of Shake Zoning and guiding me through the process. Thanks to Will Struble for his assistance creating the Basin Thickness map. Finally, thank you to the Nevada Seismological Laboratory and CCoGs for the computers that all of these scenarios were created on.

km North

0.0